Any 16:9 adapter for the GL1 will be better than the 16:9 menu setting, but that doesn't mean the 16:9 menu setting is useless, just remember to crop it in post accordingly.

I've seen the 16:9 adapter for the GL1 in action at NAB 2005 and it does make a difference, however, to be safe there's always the option of buying the Panasonic Anamorphic adapter, about the same price, and using a 72mm-58mm step down ring and using that on the GL1 for a time and then getting a used DVX100A/B a few years down the line for cheap. But that depends on how much you want to spend on the ol' GL1 I suppose.

Maybe I'm confused on how this works exactly (read some info on the product pages for the adapter). But wouldn't putting a WideAngle adapter on the camera and switching it to 16:9 via the menu give the same effect as shooting in 4:3 with the 16:9 adapter?

Do you mean letterboxed 16:9 mode? i.e., the camcorder puts black bars on a 4:3 image to simulate 16:9?

If so, in theory, it would be better to do it "in camera" since the cam's DV encoder can dedicate more of the available bit space to the active parts of the frame. Encoding the black bars uses very little bit space. But it depends on whether the cam is that smart or not.

Do you mean letterboxed 16:9 mode? i.e., the camcorder puts black bars on a 4:3 image to simulate 16:9?

If so, in theory, it would be better to do it "in camera" since the cam's DV encoder can dedicate more of the available bit space to the active parts of the frame. Encoding the black bars uses very little bit space. But it depends on whether the cam is that smart or not.

Actually, I meant the GL2's 16x9 mode, where the image is "stretched" in the viewfinder. I hope that makes more sense.

This has been subject of a lot of debate in the Sony PD/VX line too. Essentially, the consensus is that the electronic 16:9 as good as real 16:9 dedicated chips (seems obvious). There is a bit more debate about the choice between the pseudo 16:9 and just adding bars in camera (as in the VX and PDs) or in post. I started a thread and I think the responses apply to the Canon side of things too. Here is thread:

It will always play on a widescreen TV, but as a pillarboxed image to maintain the aspect ratio (make sure that ratio is set to "4/3" in TV menus or on something like autoscale, otherwise you'll get distorted images)

To convert to a 16/9 image you need to letterbox your image using an effect in a post-production softwaresuite named something like '16/9 matte' or 'letterbox'. Be aware this does cut off top and bottom of the image and replaces it with black bars. So you may lose important parts of your image if you didn't frame correctly for letterboxing (hence the setting on GL2: '16/9 guidelines' to help you frame). Then just export it to DVD/whatever and make sure the aspect in all of those settings is set to 16/9 (it will stretch out the image to fully scale the 16/9 screen).

Can someone give me some info on this one.. I'm a photographer and work with upper end Nikon and Canon Equeptment but this Video stuff is new to me. I bought the GL2 a couple years ago as a client wanted both still and video. only used it once but for the price he paid, the camera was more than paid for..
The GL2 has both the 4/3 & 16/9 settings on it but of what I've been reading, The 16/9 really isnt a wide angle. and the 16/9 lenz is needed for actual wide angle shots.
I'm trying to understand this before I buy the lenz.. Does the lenz give you a "fish-eye" or panoramic, approach to the viewing or is it just a standard viev (4/3) with the upper and lower areas cropped off.....
And if the 16/9 setting on the GL2 is a modified comp. setting, when the lenzis installed, do you still use the 4/3 setting or the 16/9..